View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method)Failure Mode and Effects AnalysisAssumption Surfacing
| Criterion |  Architecture SAAM (Software Architecture Analysis Method) |  Operations Failure Mode and Effects Analysis |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | SAAM helps teams judge an architecture’s suitability for selected tasks and changes. It is particularly useful for examining modifiability and comparing architecture alternatives with clear reasoning. | For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | High | High | Low |
Timedifferent | Preparation, scenario analysis, and findings review; effort depends on scope | 2-6 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Architecture experts and stakeholders for scenarios and weighting | 3-10 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Domain functions mapped to components and connections, Quality attributes and evaluation criteria, Typical tasks and their effects on the architecture, Reasoned evaluation or comparison of alternatives | FMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation Actions | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureChangeAnalysisComparisonQuality | RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
